[Editor’s Note: And again, reposting the repost! Be sure to click on CCEL’s link to Greg Bahnsen’s “Homosexuality: A Biblical View” at the end of this article and read what is available. Originally posted nearly a year ago today on January 25th 2014. It’s time for a re-post especially considering the nonsensical and damaging SOTU address.]

The USA is a top market for gay-friendly surrogacy, and a growing number of couples come from overseas, creating a burgeoning travel segment commonly called medical tourism.

“They all, without exception, cannot do surrogacy or egg donation in their countries,” says Ron Poole-Dayan, executive director of Men Having Babies, a non-profit support network for biological gay fathers and fathers-to-be. At least 40% of the 1,000 couples in the group are European.

The popularity of the USA with gays and lesbians worldwide who aspire to be parents is understandable. But Portland?

There are several reasons why the City of Roses, which combines small-town charm (fewer than 600,000 people) with a big-city vision that’s become an international model for good planning (light-rail, an urban-growth boundary), is becoming a magnet for gay couples on a parental mission: Read more here.

If over a third, (some say over 40%) of the world’s countries have sodomy laws on the books, it raises suspicions that there is more than a significant civil rights fight going on here, but that is for another article.

In chapter five, “The response of society: Homosexual acts as criminal” in Homosexuality: A Biblical View, Greg Bahnsen answers many of the questions we either don’t know we should be asking or we hide from since we’re afraid to field them, not having the answers. Bahnsen takes us right to the scriptures to answer questions like:

Is homosexuality an inherent right of a free society? What do we have to know in order to answer that question? Is homosexuality punishable by civil law? Can it be considered a crime? What is a right anyway and how do we know who’s right comes first? Where do we start? Who can we lawfully discriminate against or is discrimination always unlawful? Isn’t it true that we are being unlawfully discriminated against by the homosexual movement? Is it wrong for me to have such an aversion to practicing homosexuals? If we don’t allow what comes natural to them will we lose our rights to do what comes natural to us as practicing heterosexuals? What about the consensual nature of their relationships doesn’t that make it lawful? Is freedom the sole criterion of social legislation?

Here a snippet from the book to get you started and which will shed some light on the subject. We need more than light however if we’re going to see a substantial cultural change.

We must recognize that there are certain standards of behavior that society ought to require to be observed, completely apart from considerations of personal freedom and consent. Here again is seen the veiled dependence on a specific moral system when the liberty ideal is put into operation, indicating that it cannot make freedom the sole criterion of social legislation.

In other words, sanctions are necessary also, which is obvious to us as the homosexuals move forward with promoting legislation that will put sanctions on anyone who denies them the opportunity to be openly homosexual. Even their promotion of so called liberty comes with the end of liberty of others. It’s an inescapable reality. The promotion of law has to preface the promotion of liberty in order to establish that which is lawful and that which we are at liberty to do and even then we may sacrifice our liberties.

…the fact would remain that…homosexual relations cannot be engaged in without involving the decisions, interests, and actions of another. Does this amount to a criminal act against the other person and a violation of his rights? Does it have consequences that are detrimental to him and his best interests?

…those who promote the liberty ideal will say that such considerations…are beside the point because in legally sanctioned homosexual relations all participants would consent to such behavior.

…as most will intuitively recognize, a participant’s consent is not thought to condone certain crimes: e.g., virgin sacrifice in satanist cults, drug overdose, consensual death in sado-masochistic sexual relations, and “snuff films.” Inevitably we must recognize that moral men place high value on other things besides freedom and consent: for instance, justice (rules against unfair trials), security (laws against plotting to assassinate), human life (laws against all willful murder), human dignity (laws against seduction, defamation of character, public lewdness), and interpersonal integrity (laws against manipulation of people through false advertising and fraud). Furthermore, there are some things so precious or important to a person that he will often sacrifice his freedom because of them.

Follow the link provided to discover how cultural warlords are created and what the answers are to the above questions as well as others. Read chapter five in it’s entirety at the Evangelical Christian Library here.

About The Author

Kelly is the second daughter of Jeff and Sue Reins. She is an energetic, dominion minded woman who loves her domain and is motivated by her desire to share the goodness and blessings the Lord has shared with her while serving in her role as a stay-at-home daughter. She writes at www.ahthelife.blogspot.com

LAF/BW.org is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. We also use other affiliate vendors and advertising methods to keep the lights on here. Thanks for supporting us!